A prospectus of this book was circulated to a number of exports by the publisher before the actual job of writing was
begun. The opinions received have been very helpful in establishing
what I hope is the proper slant. One opinion, in particular, expressed
a point of view so similar to my own that I have asked its author, Dr. William Stein, of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, for
permission to reproduce it here.

It has always seemed to me, and I may be wrong in this, that when an
expert communicates with the relatively non-expert, he has a responsibility
to stay pretty close to the facts. An expert can speculate to other experts
without scruple. They have the equipment to meet him on his own grounds,
evaluate the evidence and accept or reject the speculation as they choose.
The non-expert has no such basis for evaluation. He has to accept relatively uncritically what the expert tells him, and hypothesis and fact soon
become confused in his mind. A plausible speculation--and the speculations
of the true expert are always plausible--can soon masquerade successfully
as gospel. In the present state of our ignorance, I would regard this as
unfortunate. It would seem to me that a book such as this one should aim
to stimulate thought and experiment among practicing scientists, and
should not lull the uninitiated into thinking that we understand more than
we do.

Print this page

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary
to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution.
We are sorry for any inconvenience.